Fury has erupted in a Surrey village after the Home Office “secretly” moved a group of migrants into a £500,000 cottage.Laleham locals and councillors say they were not given any warning before asylum seekers were placed in the property – which lies just 200 yards away from a primary school. The moving of migrants into properties across the country is part of Labour’s push to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers – Home Office minister Alex Norris said had “spiralled out of control”. The practice has long been dubbed “Operation Scatter” by critics.Under current planning laws, developers are not required to apply for permission to convert a property into a HMO for up to six occupants. But fears are rising thousands of homes nationwide risk being reassigned without due diligence as the Government races to end hotel use by 2029. One Laleham parent – who remains anonymous – told The Sun: “It’s mind-boggling. I just don’t understand why you would put asylum seekers in the middle of a tiny village where there’s nothing to do and nowhere to go.“The first duty of a Government is to keep people safe, but we don’t feel this was a safe thing to do.”The small Surrey village is home to around 2,500 residents and lies around five miles away from Heathrow Airport. The small Surrey village is home to around 2,500 residents | WIKIMEDIA COMMONSVillagers’ fears came to pass when an Afghan asylum seeker – believed to be in his early 20s – was arrested outside the £500,000 HMO after allegedly harassing schoolgirls in the area. The migrant had allegedly been told by police to stay away from the school, but was held on suspicion of harassment after he was accused of returning to the grounds. He has since been transferred to a security facility under the Mental Health Act. The Afghan national is said to have been spotted hanging around the school during drop-off and pick-up times over a number of days, according to concerned parents.
MIGRANT CRISIS – READ THE LATEST:
An Afghan asylum seeker was arrested outside the £500,000 HMO after allegedly harassing schoolgirls | GETTYThe issue was brought up during PMQs on Wednesday, with Tory MP for Spelthorne, Lincoln Jopp, asking the Prime Minister: “Who was responsible for the risk assessment that put him there?“Who screwed up, and who can I hold accountable?”Sir Keir Starmer responded: “Obviously, this is a live police investigation, and I know the Asylum Minister is looking very closely at this case.“Can I reassure him that all accommodation must meet contractual standards and the Home Office works with the police to manage all sites safely.Lincoln Jopp asked the PM: ‘Who screwed up, and who can I hold accountable?’ | HOUSE OF COMMONS”Local authorities are consulted prior to any accommodation being procured and can object to any proposal.”Mr Jopp also penned a letter to Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, outlining the concerns of Laleham residents about the safety of their children in the community. He wrote: “I would be grateful if you would investigate this as a matter of urgency and also confirm that the proper safeguarding checks have been made on all HMOs used by the Home Office in Spelthorne.“I would also add that no such placements should be made within the vicinity of schools.”Spelthorne Borough Council told residents that the migrant were moved in to the area “without the normal risk assessment”, pointing towards a lack of communication between the Home Office and the local authorities. “The council has written directly to the Home Office asking for an explanation and an assurance that this will not happen again,” it added. But a spokesman for the Home Office maintained that “Spelthorne Council was consulted before this accommodation was procured.”They said: “We urge anyone who witnesses unacceptable behaviour to report it to the police as soon as possible, and we remain in close contact with Surrey Police on this incident.“Illegal migrants are being moved into basic accommodation, as the Government scales up the use of military barracks.”A spokesman for the local authority insisted that “protecting our children remains our highest priority”.